Case LawHigh Court › Itta/105/2013 Of Commissioner Of Income...

Itta/105/2013 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax - Ii v. M/S. Intelligroup Asoa Pvt. Ltd

High Court 26 Jun 2013 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · taphc
Parties
Itta/105/2013 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax - Ii v. M/S. Intelligroup Asoa Pvt. Ltd
Date of order
26 Jun 2013
Assessment year(s)
2001-2002
Outcome
Dismissed

Case summary

In Itta/105/2013 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax - Ii v. M/S. Intelligroup Asoa Pvt. Ltd, the High Court (2013) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

Sections referenced in this judgment

The order — as passed by the High Court

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRAPRADESH AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF JUNETWO THOUSAND AND THIRTEEN PRESENT THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICESRI KALYAN JYOTI SEN GUPTA AND THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE G.ROHINI I.T.T.A. No.105 OF 2013 Between: Commissioner of Income Tax-IIHyderabad. ..... Appellant AND M/s. Intelligroup Asia Pvt Ltd.,Plot NO. 18, Software Units Layout,Madhapur, Hyderabad. .....Respondent The Court made the following : JUDGMENT:(per the Hon’ble the Chief Justice Sri K.J. Sengupta) This appeal is preferred by the Revenue in relation tothe assessment year 2001-2002 in connection with ITA No.863/Hyd/2010, on the following suggested questions of law:a.Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is justified in holdingthat there is no failure on the part of the assessee todisclose fully and truly all the material facts in spite ofthe assessee making a deliberate claim for deductionunder Sec.10A of Income Tax Act on clearlyinadmissible items? b.Whether on the facts and in the circumstances ofthe case, the Appellate Tribunal is justified in holdingthat there is no failure on the part of the assesseedespite the fact that Explanation 1 to Section 147 ofIncome Tax Act clearly prescribing that mereproduction of books of accounts would not amount totrue and full disclosure? We have heard the learned counsel for the appellantand gone through the impugned judgment and order. Thelearned Tribunal held that the pre-conditions for invokingSection 147 of the Income Tax Act are not fulfilled. Theassessment was sought to be reopened admittedly afterexpiry of four years. When the pre-conditions for reopeningare not satisfied, reopening of assessment after expiry offour years is invalid, which the learned Tribunal has rightlyconcluded. We do not find any reason to differ from thefinding of the Tribunal. Consequently, the appeal isdismissed. No order as to costs. _______________________ Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta, CJ. __________ G.Rohini, J.
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ Defend a reassessment (Sec 148) notice → 💬 Ask our CA
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation. Full disclaimer & Terms.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan